Related links

Jonathan Dennett, head at Fitzharrys School in Northcourt Road, said: “We are still asking for the same thing we were asking for a few years ago. A 20mph zone is a low cost option and I think it
would make people think when driving outside schools.”

But Mr Rose said no more zones would be created unless police enforced them.

Ch Insp Henry Parsons, from the Joint Roads Policing Unit, said: “Thames Valley Police has always maintained that roads subject to a 20mph
limit should be self-enforcing, with the design and road engineering needs in place to help motorists to appreciate that the road is subject to a lower limit, thereby helping motorists to comply
with the lower limit.”

Here here, and an apology for littering our beautiful city with thousands of pieces of red and black plastic. He should remember the 20mph folly wasn't a "waste of money", it was a waste of OUR money!

[quote][p][bold]EMBOX1[/bold] wrote:
Rodney didn't mind burning three hundred thousand pounds on the Oxford 20 limit.
I think we should demand a refund..to come from his pension.[/p][/quote]Here here, and an apology for littering our beautiful city with thousands of pieces of red and black plastic. He should remember the 20mph folly wasn't a "waste of money", it was a waste of OUR money!iklhik

NO, NO, NO. It is a mistake just look at the lives that have been saved in Oxford since the 20mph was introduced. It should now be 20 in Abingdon and 10 MPH in Oxford that way even more lives will be saved and £billions on clearing up the carnage that car drivers cause. Do it NOW

NO, NO, NO. It is a mistake just look at the lives that have been saved in Oxford since the 20mph was introduced. It should now be 20 in Abingdon and 10 MPH in Oxford that way even more lives will be saved and £billions on clearing up the carnage that car drivers cause. Do it NOWLORD PETER MACVEY 0X2 6EG

Those who support the continuation of 30 mph as the standard need to show the research that backs it up as being the most appropriate speed.

We all know it has long been in place, but why and how did it get to be the standard?

Perhaps it should be even higher?

That way, those who decry road safety (most of the comments here disregard personal safety as being of any value) will be able to go even faster.

Why should the Police be blamed for nitwits who speed?

These same nitwits would moan loudest at paying higher taxes to employ more police, wouldn't they?

No, it is not the responibility of the Peelers to catch individuals, it is the responsibility of individuals to accept the speed zones they are in and adhere to them, bearing in mind the sign is not a minimum, but a maximum -if it is safe to drive at that speed.

Not a God-given right to drive at that speed everywhere at all times, mind you.

If, as Inkpot suggests, it is hard to drive above 20 mph in Abingdon, then why is it a) an issue to reduce the speed limit to reflect the reality of the road conditions and b) why hasn't the council moved long ago to change the speed?

Those who support the continuation of 30 mph as the standard need to show the research that backs it up as being the most appropriate speed.
We all know it has long been in place, but why and how did it get to be the standard?
Perhaps it should be even higher?
That way, those who decry road safety (most of the comments here disregard personal safety as being of any value) will be able to go even faster.
Why should the Police be blamed for nitwits who speed?
These same nitwits would moan loudest at paying higher taxes to employ more police, wouldn't they?
No, it is not the responibility of the Peelers to catch individuals, it is the responsibility of individuals to accept the speed zones they are in and adhere to them, bearing in mind the sign is not a minimum, but a maximum -if it is safe to drive at that speed.
Not a God-given right to drive at that speed everywhere at all times, mind you.
If, as Inkpot suggests, it is hard to drive above 20 mph in Abingdon, then why is it a) an issue to reduce the speed limit to reflect the reality of the road conditions and b) why hasn't the council moved long ago to change the speed?
Finally, as Bart Simpson so frequently shows here, the 'commonsense' he so adores is, all too frequently, neither common, nor sense.Abberdon

Abberdon wrote:
Those who support the continuation of 30 mph as the standard need to show the research that backs it up as being the most appropriate speed.

We all know it has long been in place, but why and how did it get to be the standard?

Perhaps it should be even higher?

That way, those who decry road safety (most of the comments here disregard personal safety as being of any value) will be able to go even faster.

Why should the Police be blamed for nitwits who speed?

These same nitwits would moan loudest at paying higher taxes to employ more police, wouldn't they?

No, it is not the responibility of the Peelers to catch individuals, it is the responsibility of individuals to accept the speed zones they are in and adhere to them, bearing in mind the sign is not a minimum, but a maximum -if it is safe to drive at that speed.

Not a God-given right to drive at that speed everywhere at all times, mind you.

If, as Inkpot suggests, it is hard to drive above 20 mph in Abingdon, then why is it a) an issue to reduce the speed limit to reflect the reality of the road conditions and b) why hasn't the council moved long ago to change the speed?

Because in answer to your quaestion, if you can't do more than 20 in Abby during the day, why lower the 30 or 40 limit, to criminalise drivers at 2 am who can drive at these speeds perfectly safely. What is a safe limit outside a school at 3pm is not at 3am.

[quote][p][bold]Abberdon[/bold] wrote:
Those who support the continuation of 30 mph as the standard need to show the research that backs it up as being the most appropriate speed.
We all know it has long been in place, but why and how did it get to be the standard?
Perhaps it should be even higher?
That way, those who decry road safety (most of the comments here disregard personal safety as being of any value) will be able to go even faster.
Why should the Police be blamed for nitwits who speed?
These same nitwits would moan loudest at paying higher taxes to employ more police, wouldn't they?
No, it is not the responibility of the Peelers to catch individuals, it is the responsibility of individuals to accept the speed zones they are in and adhere to them, bearing in mind the sign is not a minimum, but a maximum -if it is safe to drive at that speed.
Not a God-given right to drive at that speed everywhere at all times, mind you.
If, as Inkpot suggests, it is hard to drive above 20 mph in Abingdon, then why is it a) an issue to reduce the speed limit to reflect the reality of the road conditions and b) why hasn't the council moved long ago to change the speed?
Finally, as Bart Simpson so frequently shows here, the 'commonsense' he so adores is, all too frequently, neither common, nor sense.[/p][/quote]Because in answer to your quaestion, if you can't do more than 20 in Abby during the day, why lower the 30 or 40 limit, to criminalise drivers at 2 am who can drive at these speeds perfectly safely. What is a safe limit outside a school at 3pm is not at 3am.LORD PETER MACVEY 0X2 6EG